this post was submitted on 31 Mar 2024
121 points (88.5% liked)

World News

38691 readers
2959 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Sami@lemmy.zip 3 points 6 months ago

Both of those groups do represent a sizeable portion of their respective people but both people remain fractured without getting into the distinction between a people and an officially recognized country.

Unless you’re saying that Hamas is the representative of the Gazan people and so that makes all of Gaza responsible for the attack on Israel?

Hamas is the current representation of the Palestinian armed resistance. Palestinian resistance was not always violent and was not always led by religious fundamentalists. Take your above sentence to its logical conclusion, let's say that they are fully representative then what? Are all the Gazan civilians also terrorist supporters/sympathizers too?

My point is that designating movements that seek to overthrow regimes or fight against occupation purely as terrorists ignores actual motivations of these groups and the people they represent politically (regardless of how much public support they actually have).

You can choose to believe that Palestinians and Yemenis take up arms to spread fear and kill for the sake of their religious beliefs/hatred or because of their inherent nature or some other reasoning, or you can offer the same intellectual charity that you offer Israeli people who support current and previous regimes and acts of unimaginable brutality.

Both those groups hold horribly regressive ideologies but the reason that they exist cannot be reduced to just terrorism no matter how convenient it may be ideologically. Attacks on civilians on Oct 7 are not justified but resistance groups have a right to resist occupation with force under international law. The Houthis are the de facto authority in Yemen and despite not having international recognition are taking actions that could be justified under the obligation of signatories to the genocide convention.

You might disagree with either of these framings and rightly so as matters of international law are complex but you have to at the very least offer the same charitability in trying to analyze the underlying motivations even if the groups representing these actions are reprehensible.